Marlee is knitting a

I need help with LINES!!!! ASAP!!!!!!

Mumz [18]

Answer:

∠ 2 = 104°

Step-by-step explanation:

Since the trees are parallel, then

∠ 2 and 76° are same- side interior angles and are supplementary, thus

∠ 2 + 76° = 180° ( subtract 76° from both sides )

∠ 2 = 104°

6 0

3 years ago

Can u solve it i dunno how:)

pshichka [43]

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation

I think it is $170 a month.

Is subtracted 8,500-6,460 and that gave me 2,040.

I divided that by 12 and it gave me 170

6 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Select all the statements that are true

masya89 [10]

Answer:

Options 2, 4 and 6 are True.

Step-by-step explanation:

Triangle MNO is dilated by a scale factor of $\frac{3}{2}$ centered at M(0, 6).

Rule to be followed to dilate the vertices of the given triangle,

(x, y) → (kx, ky)

Here, k = scale factor

By this rule vertices of the new triangle M'N'O' will be,

M(0, 6) → M'(0, 6) [Coordinates of M' will remain same as M because center of dilation is point M]

N(-4, -4) → N'(-6, -6)

O(6, -2) → O'(9, -3)

Option 1

M'N' is shorter than MN

Distance between M and N = $\sqrt{(0+4)^2+(6+4)^2}$

= 10.77

Distance between M' and N' = $\sqrt{(0+6)^2+(6+6)^2}$

= 13.42

Therefore M'N' > MN

Therefore, Option A is False.

Option 2

ON is shorter than O'N'

True.

Option 3

OM is longer than O'M'

False

Option 4

ON is parallel to O'N'

Since OM and MN are dilated with the same scale factor, O'N' will be parallel to ON.

True.

Option 5

OM is parallel than O'M'

Since, O'M' is the dilated form of OM,

Therefore, all the points (O, M and M') will be in a straight line.

False

Option 6

M'N' coincide with MN

True.

Therefore, Options 2, 4 and 6 are True.

3 0

3 years ago

I need help!!! Pleasssse!!!!

Zinaida [17]

Given the ratio, you know that:
length = 6x
width = 2x
height = 7x

Because the sum of the length and the width is 24 cm, you can write the equation:
6x + 2x = 24
Solve:
8x = 24
x = 3

Plug the 3 back into the expressions written earlier for length, width, and height.
length = 18 cm
width = 6 cm
height = 21 cm

Use the formula SA = 2B + Ph to solve for the surface area.
Surface Area = 2(area of the base) + (perimeter of the base)(height)

I'm going to plug in l, w, and h as variables for length, width, and height to show the exact way to solve for the B and P.
SA = 2lw + 2(l + w)h
SA = 2(18)(6) + 2(18 + 6)(21)
SA = 216 + 2(24)(21)
SA = 216 + 1008
SA = 1224

The surface area is 1,224 cm^2.

7 0

3 years ago

Frank, who lives in Texas, and his sister Lilly, who lives in Japan, correspond regularly. From what he can tell from the postma

Hoochie [10]

Question:

The available options are:

(A) There is convincing evidence that there is no difference in the mean delivery times.

(B) There is convincing evidence that there is a difference in the mean delivery times.

(C) There is convincing evidence that the mean delivery time from Japan to Texas is greater than the mean delivery time from Texas to Japan.

(D) There is not convincing evidence that the mean delivery time from Japan to Texas is greater than the mean delivery time from Texas to Japan. (E) The t-test cannot be used for sample sizes that are this small.

Answer:

The correct option is;

(A) There is convincing evidence that there is no difference in the mean delivery times.

Step-by-step explanation:

Here we have the formula for the two-sample t-test given s;

$t =\frac{\overbar\overline{\rm x}_1 - \overbar\overline{\rm x}_2 }{\sqrt{\frac{\sigma ^2_1}{n_1} } +\frac{\sigma ^2_2}{n_2} }}$

To Texas N₁ = 12, $\overline{\rm x}_1$ =8.74 σ₁ = 2.92 SE Mean₁ = 0.84

To Japan N₂ = 9 $\overline{\rm x}_2$ = 6.75 σ₂ = 2.56 SE Mean₁ = 0.85

t = 1.667

Where the null hypothesis is

mu To Texas = mu To Japan and the alternative is

mu To Texas > mu To Japan

Here since the observed P value of P = 0.058 is greater than the significance level of 0.05 we fail to reject the null hypothesis and we will therefore, not accept the alternative hypothesis.

Hence, there is convincing evidence that there is no difference in the mean delivery times.

3 0

3 years ago